I like the idea of specifying the primary language on the root,
and then specifying other languages as they occur in the tree.
The code for multiple languages is "mul":
http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/englangn.html#mn
I agree that xml:lang must not be changed to take a list of
languages.
The appropriate way to provide a list of languages is to use
the appropriate HTTP header and/or the <meta> element. HTML
allows:
<meta http-equiv="Content-Language" content="fr, de, en">
Looking quickly through the public XHTML 2 draft, I couldn't
find a mention of http-equiv. Is it still there?
Misha
-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-i18n-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-i18n-ig-request@w3.org] On
Behalf Of Stephen Deach
Sent: 27 January 2005 16:02
To: Richard Ishida; public-i18n-core@w3.org; i18n IG
Subject: Language tags on root (was: Re: XHTML2 review - Please check)
If you recommend/require xml:lang on the html element, don't come up
with a
value for "mixed", instead set the "primary"/"default" language there;
then
allow xml:lang on subnodes within head/body as needed for other
languages
in a mixed-language document. (In fact, it has been my regular
recommendation for language tagging of all XML document formats to place
a
default/primary language tag on the root node or the highest node above
any
text content; then explicitly subtag any language changes (excluding
"adopted words", but always tag a word/phrase/etc. you wish to be
hyphenated/spell-checked/grammar-checked using a different dictionary
than
the base language).
I don't remember how/if Dublin Core handles mixed-language docs (some dc
entries allow lists of values, others don't), but you might consider a
metadata component to indicate mixed-language content is present.
It would be of significant impact to existing applications to change
xml:lang to allow a list, and probably add greater ambiguity/confusion;
it
would be better to add another attribute to carry a list of contained
languages on the root node is you want it for go/no-go type decisions
over
whether you can accept/read the doc and allow xml:lang to set the
primary/default language.
--SDeach
At 2005.01.27-14:49(+0000), Richard Ishida wrote:
>I have updated the table of review comments at
>
>http://www.w3.org/International/2004/10/xhtml2-i18n-review.html
>
>Please check the text and tell me whether I can send to the HTML group.
>
>You should check, in particular, comments 38a to the end plus any other
>comments with a number followed by a,b or c.
>
>Also: When I spoke with Steven Pemberton a few days ago, he said why
don't
>we request that xml:lang be mandatory on the html tag. Perhaps we
could
>discuss this at the next meeting. Of course, the sticking point would
be
>where you have a mulilingual document. However, may be better to think
of
>an appropriate value for such documents rather than simply abandon the
>possibility of solving once and for all the problem of people not
marking
>up documents with language information.
>
>RI
>
>
>
>
>============
>Richard Ishida
>W3C
>
>contact info:
>http://www.w3.org/People/Ishida/
>
>W3C Internationalization:
>http://www.w3.org/International/
>
>Publication blog:
>http://people.w3.org/rishida/blog/
>
---Steve Deach
sdeach@adobe.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Visit our Internet site at http://www.reuters.com
Get closer to the financial markets with Reuters Messaging - for more
information and to register, visit http://www.reuters.com/messaging
Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual
sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be
the views of Reuters Ltd.